I think that the answer simply avoided the issue at hand, as this is not, or should be not about core beliefs or personal perspectives. This is, or should be, about a unified goal where the whole team understands and agrees to a set of objective rules. Or… are "rules" simply texts to be interpreted as seen fit from each of the moderators?Shouldn't rules be objective? If a moderator from the team disagrees with one or more of the rules, well, it should be her/his prerogative to stop being a moderator and participate simply as a regular forum user, instead of "having the right to not carry out actions they disagree with." Under the same line of reasoning, any user should then have the right to not follow the "rules" they might disagree with. Rules are dictatorial because that is how they work, otherwise they would be recommendations and they would not be enforceable.
Anyway, returning to the original topic…
dakanga wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 5:20 pm
I am though not concerned with this issue.
This seemed more of a personal answer than a team or consensus-driven one, but there is no problem at all. So, if you are not actually concerned with the signature ruling or the messages in them, who is?
dakanga wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 5:20 pm
I was just interested to get a feeling for how large the problem was.
A matter of quantity vs. quality?